Amending the Kansas open records act by limiting certain charges for furnishing records and employee time required to make records available and exempting certain records from disclosure and amending the Kansas open meetings act by providing for the membership calculation of subordinate groups and requiring public bodies or agencies that live stream meetings to ensure that the public is able to observe.
Impact
The implications of HB 2134 on state laws include a provision that prohibits excessive charges for electronic copies of public records, ensuring that access to governmental information is facilitated without prohibitive costs. It also mandates that county or district attorneys report violations of open records laws to the Attorney General annually in October rather than January, which could result in swifter governmental action in addressing potential violations.
Summary
House Bill 2134 is centered around reforming the Kansas Open Records Act and Open Meetings Act. The bill proposes to amend regulations concerning public access to governmental records, aiming to limit certain charges for the furnishing of records and the time required by employees to make these records accessible. One of the key stipulations of the bill is the exemption of records compiled during formally closed investigations with no found violations, and those containing obscene material, from disclosure. This is intended to balance public access with the need to protect sensitive information during investigations.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding HB 2134 has been generally positive, as advocates laud the bill for promoting transparency and reducing financial barriers to accessing public records. However, there are concerns from some legislators about the potential for overreach in the exemptions granted, particularly regarding closed investigations. Critics argue that while the intention is to enhance accessibility, it shouldn’t come at the risk of compromising necessary confidentiality in sensitive matters.
Contention
A point of contention among lawmakers involves the exemptions related to open records, especially the possibility that closing off access to certain records may hinder the public's right to know. Legislators worry that exempting records from disclosure could lead to reduced accountability of public officials. The balance between ensuring transparency and protecting the integrity of certain investigations remains a topic of heated discussion throughout the legislation process for HB 2134.
Prohibiting charges for electronic copies and determinations of whether a record exists and limiting charges for employee time required to make records available under the Kansas open records act.
Extending restrictions on fees charged for records by state agencies under the open records act to include fees charged for records by political and taxing subdivisions.
House Substitute for SB 349 by Committee on Judiciary - Continuing in existence certain exceptions to the disclosure of public records under the open records act.
Amending the Kansas pet animal act to require the Kansas department of agriculture to maintain records of inspections for not less than five years and removing the requirement that the commissioner only apply federal rules and regulations to United States department of agriculture licensed animal distributors and animal breeders.
Prohibiting fees for electronic copies of records under the open records act, exempting from disclosure formally closed investigations with no found violations, requiring county or district attorneys to file reports of violations with the attorney general in October instead of January, determining the membership calculation of subordinate groups under the open meetings act, requiring public bodies or agencies that live stream meetings to ensure that the public is able to observe and providing for a five minute deviation to resume an open meeting at the conclusion of executive sessions.